I thought it might be nice to ask everyone on my last Lençóis Maranhenses tour if I could publish some of their images. I had intended them for my newsletter, but after some thinking, I felt it would be more suitable for this blog.
Everyone sent me a three to ten images or so. I appreciate that many did not send me them as an intended portfolio, but because it is something I am passionate about, I would like to discuss their edits in the context of portfolios.
In my view, even when images aren’t intended to be part of the same set, by grouping unrelated images together, we can learn a lot. Sometimes we find that certain images show less luminance than intended when grouped with others. Or it could be the other way round. Ultimately, the aim is to find a way to ‘see again’, or to learn something about the images we did not know. I use many techniques to ‘shake up my vision’ to notice things in the work that I may have become blind to from staring at the work for too long.
I thought everyone’s work was beautiful and nice to see. So none of this is meant as any negative criticism, and more about ‘food for thought’. Feedback or opinions, are to be taken with a pinch of salt, unless you find value in them, in which case take them as priceless when they help you gain more insight into what you do. An opinion that is valuable is gold. An opinion that does not resonate, is just noise, and not for you.
Vera Conley
I really like Vera’s accomplished level of editing. She wrote to me that she felt the work had gone in quite a radical direction for her, and I think this is a case of someone going beyond their own comfort zone and into some new territory. Which is always a delight to see.
I think Vera has pushed herself into a new place in her work. When we do that, the terrain is new, unfamiliar and also, it means that we haven’t learned quite how it works just yet, so the first while here we’re going to experiment, and play around to see what works and what doesn’t. Often the first foray into a new space in our work has the power to hit upon some new ideas that we will keep, and some that won’t stick.
Vera has appeared to use some kind of solarisation effect with these images. If this working with solarisation continues, I think that there will be further refinement. Not because it is unrefined right now, but simply because once we start working with some new approach, refinement of technique or development of is inevitable.
Years ago, most photographer’s aspirations were to simply come home with some nice images where they were technically correct, had a nice composition and good light. But I think the bar has been set much higher these days. Nice images isn’t going to get you noticed. Individuality in your work will. To have a recognisable unique style to your work is, in my view, where good photography is at these days.
I enjoyed very much seeing Vera take a lateral approach to the edits. I love that her edits are far removed from what we saw and photographed. It is a skill that is so sadly under appreciated: I believe that most folks think that good photography is all about improving their field work, but the editing stage can, and is, a highly creative space to work in, that requires a lot of learning and talent. It is also the space where it is more possible to impart your own individuality through careful editing.
I thought it would be great to show the entire set that Vera sent me. I think the level of editing ability in judging luminosities is very high in Vera’s work. It depends of course on what one is aiming to achieve, but I think by converting these to black and white, we can see there may be further room for luminosity fine tuning, should Vera think the work needs it.
I often convert to black and white, because when I remove colour, I’m able to see how the luminosities within each image hang together, and also, how they hang together as a set.
Once colour is removed, we can see the luminosities more clearly. If I pay attention to the highlights in the images then images 1, 2, 6, 7 and 9 have similar high key tones in them. Images 3, 4, and 8 and 10 are of a lower register highlights, more like upper mid-tones. The last image (10) is my personal favourite: it just seems to glow whether in black and white or in colour.
Similar with the darker tones in the work, I can see that images 5 and 6 have the darkest tones in the work.
These are merely observations, and not in any way a criticism of the work. I find that occasionally converting my portfolio sets to black and white extremely useful in gaining an ‘understanding’ how the luminosities work across the set. With this improved understanding it is up to the owner of the work if they wish to make further adjustments based on what the conversion has shown them.
I find Vera’s level of editing to be highly accomplished. She understands luminosity and hue very well, in and above her composition style where she is comfortable utilising sections of a subject, and placing them towards the edge of the frame as and when required.
Christian Surber
I think it is always interesting not just to see what participants choose to photograph, but more so for me, how they choose to edit the work. One of the more notable things for me is that a photographer’s own aesthetic taste tends to come through in their edits. That translates to their choice of strong / weak colour, and also contrasts. Christian’s landscape edits have more vibrancy in the colours and his choice of luminances go into the higher registers, very close, if not towards the right hand wall. It is his personality you see on display here with these edits in terms of how he prefers to work with more primary blues as well as highlights almost bleeding off the page.
If we look at the entire set he sent me, we can see that he is also no stranger to working with harder contrasts when he feels like it (images 4, and 8). I like the final image (8) and how the high key luminosities of the image bleed into the upper top left corner of the image from very stark textured water. He’s not afraid to go from one extreme to the other.
I’d also comment that his crops are very tight. This isn’t a criticism, but again an observation that he seems to be much happier using telephotos and getting right into the heart of the composition.
Because the crops are tight, I feel that some of the images may benefit from some ‘quietening’ towards the edges of the frame. Image 1’s wall of texture for instance, may benefit from some softening towards the upper region of the frame:
It’s a different style, and Chris may disagree with me on this. I have found for myself, that edges of the frame have a lot of power. They tend to catch your periphery vision, which I like to think of as my subconscious vision. Usually when the contrast levels at the edge of the frame are the same as the contrasts in the centre, they tend to be more noticeable. I have found that by reducing contrasts towards the outer edges of the frame, can stop the eye slamming into the sides of the frame, and bring it back towards the centre of the image, where we should (normally) return to.
Bruno Vais
Each of the three images Bruno sent me were not intended to be a portfolio. But somehow I still feel there is something that makes me know that they are from the same photographer.
Compared to some of the other images, there is less of the elipses, curves, or standard graphic ‘pleasing’ nature to this work. Images 1 and 2 are less about simple elegant curves, and more about things being angular. Slightly difficult. His contrast work on the first two is very high, and I think that is something that is where I feel I see ‘Bruno’ in the work. Image 3 is perhaps less relatable to the other two, but is still recognisable as being one of his images.
If I were to suggest something, it would be to use the first two images as a set, and since the contrasts on image 2 are high, then it feels natural to think of doing the same thing with image 1. If we turn the two images to black and white we will see that image 1 is much softer in tone compared to image 2;
Now if I balance the tones of image 1, to be more stark, to match image 2, I get this;
Which I feel makes image 1 more in sync with image 2.
Let’s reinstate the colour and now review:
As much as these images were not intended to be a set, or portfolio. One can notice possible discrepancies if laid out next to other images.
Reference points are important. If you are wondering if your work is punchy enough, or soft enough, or high-key enough, then by laying them out together we can often see where we may wish to tune the images.
I should stress that this is always a highly personal decision. If you ‘see’ discrepancies in your work when you lay unrelated work out together, then that is what you see. If another is telling you there are discrepancies and you yourself do not see them, then they aren’t there. You can only work with what you notice yourself.
So again, laying out unrelated work together, may show you things about your work you did not even know. It is a technique I use regularly, and it is to help me gain a better understanding. As to whether I feel there are discrepancies or I need to act upon any new information on my work, is entirely up to me, and it should be for you also.
John Motzi
John’s images showed delicacy with the tones when required, but also he is not afraid to go high key when he felt like it, such as in the central image below.
I appreciate that John didn’t send these to me as an intended portfolio, but let’s just assume that a portfolio was in mind with the set below:
If we convert this set to black and white, as we did with a few of the other participants, we can see that there are three groupings of luminance. Images 1, 6 & 7 have the same upper mid-tone luminances. Image 4 stands out on its own, and images 2, 3, 5and perhaps 8 have the same mid-tone luminances.
Temporarily converting a set to monochrome really does help in learning how the luminosities of the set hang together, and also, allow us to remove the distraction of colour.
With regards to composition, what we may have thought as tonally different or more isolated, such as the sand dunes against the water may appear less so when colour is removed. No judgement intended, merely to illustrate that when colour is removed, we often get a true sense of the tonal separation in the work, and I often find that using this technique tells me I need to push the separation further in the work.
In my opinion, John’s set of images show that there is room to separate the tones more, if he so chooses to do so.
I would suggest though that the top right picture has been pushed as far as it can go, in terms of blacks and whites, this image may ‘lead the way’ for the others to follow? Or does it require to be calmed down, to fit more in-line with the others? Perhaps if any further adjustments are made, it may be a case of doing both.
Thank you to everyone who chose to submit their images. It was a very enjoyable tour.
Post amble
The human eye is highly adaptable, and tends to distort reality. The more you stare at your work, the more acclimatised you become to it, and the less objective you’re able to be. This is not a theory, this is fact.
Although many of the images submitted above were not intended as a portfolio, by grouping related, or even more so, unrelated work together, the differences between work can be observed. We are not looking for problems, we are looking for an improved level of understanding. We are looking to heighten our awareness.
What you do with that new level of awareness is up to you.
By periodically putting on a black and white layer whilst editing single images can be extremely useful in assessing the tonal separation in your edit. I tend to find I am more inclined to increase separation in tones between objects in the frame when I edit with a black & white layer enabled. I then revert back to colour, and review.
Additionally, grouping sets of images together, whether they are intended to be in a portfolio or not, can aid insights into what you do. It can even show you if there is a style to your work. Sure, it can show discrepancies and errors in your work also, but that is not really the main point. The main point is that we are looking for heightened awareness. We are looking for understanding of what we do.
And by improving our understanding, we are able to make better decisions about what we do.
The first key is: self reflection. If you’re someone who tends to reflect a lot, then apply it to your work. It’s a skill that not everyone has. I am of the opinion that most do not reflect, do not review or think about their past work much. It is a failing not to do so.
Looking for more lessons?
If you’re interested in this, then this portfolio masterclass covers it in more detail:
The second key is: inquisitiveness. If you’re someone who is always asking questions, specifically about what you do, then that is another skill. Being able to reconsider your work, is a hugely beneficial skill to have.
For most of us, we need tools to help us ‘see’ who we are, and to understand better what we are creating.
I think most photographers edit on a single image basis only. And few review their work over the past year or so. If you’re not putting collections together, then you’re not going to be able to assess who you are as a photographer.
I’d bet that if you put unrelated work together into a folder, you would still see some relation, on some level, between the images. And in the process of doing so, you would gain a further glimpse into who you really are, as a photographer.
